Investigators submit file on Paddick drug claims

A police investigation into allegations that the Metropolitan Police commander Brian Paddick smoked cannabis have been sent to Crown prosecutors to decide whether he should be charged.

It is understood, however, that the four-month investigation has uncovered little or no incriminating evidence against the 43-year-old officer.

Commander Paddick, who introduced a groundbreaking liberal pilot scheme to caution for cannabis possession in a south London borough, is not expected to face criminal charges and is likely to receive only a minor disciplinary reprimand. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is expected to take at least two weeks to decide whether there is sufficient evidence, and whether it is in the public interest, to bring charges against the senior officer.

Mr Paddick was moved in March to a job in Scotland Yard's human resources department from his high-profile role as leader of Lambeth borough police, which includes Brixton, after an ex-boyfriend alleged that he smoked at least 100 cannabis joints.

The police inquiry, headed by Gordon Clark, the Deputy Chief Constable of Humberside, also examined claims that Mr Paddick allowed the drug to be kept in his home by James Renolleau, and whether Mr Paddick had breached police guidelines by not telling his superiors that Mr Renolleau was on bail for alleged fraud while they were together. Mr Renolleau made the drug allegations in a newspaper article for which he was paid £100,000. Mr Paddick denies the claims.

It is understood that the evidence the inquiry has obtained against Mr Paddick is the testimony of his former lover, a box that Mr Renolleau claims was used to hold the cannabis, and a tape recording between the officer and Mr Renolleau.

News that the investigation file had been passed on to the CPS came as a committee of the Metropolitan Police Authority, the body which will rule on any disciplinary action, met to discuss the case. The committee, which met in private, issued a statement saying it was postponing its decision until the CPS had decided whether to proceed with criminal charges. The Police Authority said: "As in all cases, it is normal practice for criminal proceedings to take precedence over disciplinary matters."